Last Updated:
If the quality of the road is strictly linked with the toll, then contractors and agencies will be forced to maintain the road better. This will make the journey safe and time saving. NHAI has now formed a committee to set standards.
New Delhi. There is resentment among the people due to the collection of toll despite the poor condition of many National Highways (NH) of the country. Even the High Court and the Supreme Court have commented on this and called it wrong to collect toll from the drivers despite the bad roads. Now the Road Transport Ministry has become active to find a permanent solution to this problem. The ministry plans to stop toll collection on bad roads or reduce toll rates. According to a report in Times of India, the ministry has formed an expert panel to decide under what circumstances toll collection on poor national highways (NHs) should be completely stopped or reduced.
Till now there was no clear, uniform rule for closing toll. The result was that some people went to court and many High Courts also commented that it is not appropriate to collect toll on bad roads. The Supreme Court has also said earlier that “the public cannot be forced to pay toll for dilapidated roads.”
Committee will set standards
Many times, on a long highway, potholes are formed at only a few places or there is minor damage. In such a situation, the government felt it was unfair to stop the toll completely. On the other hand, there are many highways where repairs are not done for months and yet full toll is collected. To eliminate these contradictions, the committee will now examine aspects like road quality, travel time, number of potholes, and state of maintenance on a measurable scale. The committee will submit its report within a month.
An official said, “First, we need to set clear standards that link toll collection to road quality and maintenance of the NH. It would not always be appropriate to stop toll collection just because of a few potholes or some small damaged stretches. Therefore, there needs to be a measurable, and not subjective, way to define inconvenience. The panel will submit its report, after which we will decide the further course of action.”
